Earlier this month, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its ruling in Render v. ThyssenKrupp Elevator (Canada) Limited. This decision deals primarily with the plaintiff’s appeal of the trial ruling that his former employer had cause to terminate his employment, and he thus had no severance entitlement.

Over the course of the pandemic, many employers (particularly those in retail, hospitality and tourism) experienced a significant downturn in business. As a result, some made the difficult decision to either lay-off or dismiss staff. A recent court decision from British Columbia considers whether an employer’s dramatic loss of revenue (which informed the decision to end employment) should properly be considered a “frustration of employment.”

Over the past few months, the provincial government has introduced several legislative changes that impact upon the workplace and require employers to meet new requirements.

In early December 2021, the Ontario Government passed into law a ban on non-compete agreements. Non-competes are a form of restrictive covenant used to limit the ability of employees to seek work with competitive alternate employers. Ontario’s non-compete ban took retroactive effect as of October 25, 2021. But that begged the question, what happens to non-compete agreements entered into before this date?

As we have written in an earlier article, a relatively common question employment lawyers receive (from both employees and employers) is whether it is lawful to secretly record conversations at work. Individuals may be motivated to take this step for a number of reasons, such as trying to capture evidence of misconduct, or to safeguard against allegations arising from a contentious meeting.

As the pandemic reaches the two year mark, the Omicron variant has taken hold across the country. In response, public health agencies have updated their recommendations and protocols. With the introduction of booster shots, new quality standards for facial masks, and limited access to testing, employers may quickly come to find their existing COVID-19 policies are out of date.

In wrongful dismissal cases, absent a lawful written contractual entitlement, the courts conduct an individualized assessment to determine what would be reasonable notice of the dismissal. In a recent contribution to First Reference Talks (a collaborative HR and employment law advisory blog), Paul Willetts highlighted two wrongful dismissal cases where the short-service plaintiffs who otherwise differed significantly (in terms of age, compensation and character of employment), both received a 2.5 month notice period.

The Government of Ontario has announced that Infectious Disease Emergency Leave (“IDEL”) will be extended for a fifth time. It will now cover the period from March 1, 2020 to July 30, 2022. As a result of this change, it is possible that the worst effected employees may find themselves out of work, and without pay, for a staggering 2 years and 5 months.

While vaccination mandates and the ongoing pandemic continue to dominate headlines, less attention has been given to the major changes to Ontario employment law currently being proposed at Queen’s Park. A ban on non-compete clauses, a new minimum wage, and a legally protected right to wear poppies in the workplace are just some of what may be coming.

Over the past several weeks many Ontario employers have implemented policies setting out COVID-19 vaccination requirements for their staff. While in some sectors, such as long-term care, employee vaccination is now mandatory, in most it is not. Nonetheless, a number of employers, such as the City of Toronto, have opted to implement mandatory vaccination policies for their staff.

Last year the Ontario Superior Court awarded a former Microsoft employee 23.75 months’ pay in lieu of notice following his without cause dismissal from employment. The court’s award included damages for stock awards that would have vested during the applicable notice period.

Dismissed employees are expected to actively search for new work if they want to preserve full severance rights. Yet a recent case out of Ontario suggests there may be more leniency for older workers. This reflects a judicial acknowledgment of the fact that re-employment opportunities tend to become scarce past a certain age.

Canada will hold its election for the 44th Parliament on September 20, 2021. To ensure all eligible Canadians have the opportunity to vote, the Canada Elections Act (the “CEA”) establishes special protections for workers on polling day.

It is beginning to feel a lot like Groundhog Day. For the fourth time since its inception, the Ontario government has extended the length of Infectious Disease Emergency Leave (“IDEL”). It will now operate until at least December 31, 2021. [Click here for our coverage of previous IDEL extensions.]

Earlier this week, the Ontario government amended the provincial regulation governing businesses and organizations at Step 3 and the “Roadmap Exit Step” of its Roadmap to Reopen Plan. It is important to note that, at present, Ontario remains at Step 3, having yet to reach the Roadmap Exit Step.

Hiring a new employee is an investment, and it is important to start the relationship on the right foot. Both parties need to have a clear understanding from the outset of their role, rights, and responsibilities. Where there is confusion in this regard, disagreement and disputes may follow.

Investigations have become common occurrences in the modern workplace. Their rise in popularity has corresponded with statutory changes which require employers to investigate certain claims of misconduct (such as those related to workplace harassment or violence).

The dog days of summer are upon us. As employees head to cottages (or their backyard), it is a good time for employers to review vacation policies to ensure they are fit for purpose. Managing and tracking employee vacation entitlement can be one of the trickier things for employers to navigate. Errors in this regard can result in unnecessary disputes and unintended liability.